CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

REPORT DATE: 1112/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4

MEETING DATE: 1/19/2016

TO: City of Belvedere Planning Commission

FROM: Jayni Allsep, Planning Consultant

REVIEWED BY: Irene Borba, City Planner Emily Longfellow, Deputy City Attorney

SUBJECT: Design Review Permit to Construct Floating Dock, Gangway, and Boat Lift on Property Located at 91 West Shore Road

RECOMMENDATION The applicant requests a Design Review Permit for improvements to the waterfront area located at 91 West Shore Road, as described in more detail below. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the required public hearing and take the following actions: MOTION 1 Adopt Resolution adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration that addresses proposed floating dock, gangway, and boat lift on property located at 91 West Shore Road (Attachment 1); and

MOTION2 Adopt Resolution granting Design Review approval for proposed floating dock, gangway, and boat lift on property located at 91 West Shore Road, with conditions (Attachment 2).

PROPERTY SUMMARY Project Address: 91 West Shore Road APN: 060-303-15 Project Applicant: David Holscher, Holscher Architecture Property Owner: Gardner Baldwin GP Designation: Medium Density 3.1-to 6.0 units per acre Zoning: R-1 W Zoning District-West Shore Road Existing Use: Single Family Residential

Site Characteristics: The project site is a developed residential property located within the R-1 W Zoning District. The West Shore Road Area is a geographically distinct neighborhood situated at the western base of Belvedere Island. Other properties on the bayside of West Shore Road are similarly developed, including waterfront improvements such as piers, gangways, boat lifts and floating docks. The shoreline along West Shore Road is riprap along the foreshore area, which provides shore protection from wind-generated wave action from the north and west directions. There is no public access to Richardson Bay from West Shore Road; however, there are public view easements at the turnaround areas along West Shore Road. The property has a total lot area of 12,544 square feet, a portion of which is below the mean low water line along Richardson Bay. BACKGROUND/PROPERTY HISTORY The property is developed with a single-family residence (originally built in 1971), which includes a large deck at the rear of the residence along the shoreline. An existing galvanized steel/wood pier is accessed from the rear deck via a gate and set of stairs. Based on a review of City records, design review and building permits were issued for numerous additions and modifications to the residence and property over the years, including a dark room addition (1982), second-story addition and variance (1986), front yard fence (1993), a 450 sq. ft. addition and exception to floor area (1996), roof-mounted solar equipment (2004), replacement of decking material (2004), front-yard landscaping (2006), and new windows (2011). The existing pier was built in 1994 to replace a damaged wood pier. In addition, there is an existing boat lift on the east side of the property which is accessed from the rear deck. Based on the topographic survey submitted with the application, the deck of the boat lift, which measures approximately 13 ft. X 7 ft., extends beyond the side property line and onto the adjacent property at 93 West Shore Road. Staff has not found any permit or approval documents associated with the existing boat lift. PROJECT ANALYSIS The applicant requests approval of a Design Review permit for waterside improvements including installation of a new floating dock, gangway and boat lift, as detailed below. The application is included as Attachment 3 and project plans are included as Attachment 4. • A 29' X 8' floating dock (232 sq. ft.) supported by three (3) new steel piles. The surface of the floating dock is proposed to be Pau Lope, a hardwood similar to Ipe. • A 4' X 26' gangway (104 sq. ft.) to connect floating dock with existing galvanized steel pier; gangway is proposed to have galvanized steel railing; and • A boat lift (max lifting capacity of 6,000 lbs.) to be installed on the southeast side of the existing steel pier. Construction Staging. New piles would be installed via barge-mounted crane that would be brought to the site via Richardson Bay. All other equipment would be staged from the shore and all other structural lumber would be installed via hand labor from the shore. No outdoor speakers, lighting, or new sources of illumination are proposed as part of this project. Belvedere General Plan 2030 The most relevant goals and policies of the Belvedere General Plan 2030 are listed below: Sustainability and Resource Conservation Element (Chapter 4): Goal SUST-10: Protect natural habitats and biological resources including sensitive aquatic habitat, streams, and riparian corridors.

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 2 Policy SUST-10.1: Remain updated on the status of potential avoidance and mitigation measures related to potentially endangered and special status species. Policy SUST-10.2: Regulate and mitigate the impacts of pile replacement, installation and reinforcement for structures built over water and installation and expansion of piers, docks and boat hoists. Policy SUST-10.4: Protect eelgrass colonies and individual eelgrass plants. Actions: SUST-10.4.1: Development activities shall be designed to avoid impacting areas where surveys document the presence of beds and patches of eelgrass. SUST-10.4.2: Permanent structures such as piers and docks shall be designed to maximize the amount of sunlight available to eelgrass, as based on the best available research. SUST-10.4.3: Mitigations to eelgrass, based on the best available science, shall be implemented if avoidance and minimization measures are not feasible. Community Design Element (Chapter 7): This chapter contains the following description of the West Shore Road neighborhood: Existing Neighborhood Character - West Shore Road The West Shore Road Area is a geographically distinct neighborhood situated at the western base of Belvedere Island. It contains predominantly one and two-story homes lining West Shore Road, which were initially built in the 1960's, with some new homes replacing existing homes in recent years. Most of the homes are on the western side of the roadway, with direct frontage on Richardson Bay. Steep cliffs line the eastern side of the road. From the street, many of the homes resemble those of the Lagoon area, with privacy fences screening many front yard areas. However, unlike the Lagoon area where homes are situated on filled lots, many homes on West Shore Road project out above the water on pilings. Landscape screening between homes is rare in this part of the community. View easements at turnarounds in West Shore Road are sometimes landscaped with trees but future landscaping plantings in these areas are limited by the terms of the easements. Conformance witlt General Plan Policies As conditioned, staff believes that the project conforms to relevant goals and policies of the General Plan. Regarding policies aimed at protecting sensitive aquatic habitat, eelgrass is known to exist along the shoreline of West Shore Road where the project is located. During a preliminary review by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW), it was noted that the project site lies on top of an existing eelgrass bed. Mitigation Measures in the Initial Study/MND and included as conditions of approval, identify in-water construction requirements, environmental work windows, and requirements for pre- and post-construction eel grass surveys in accordance with recommendations of National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW). Furthermore, if eelgrass is determined to be present within the construction zone of the project, and if disturbance cannot be avoided, a monitoring and mitigation plan is required to ensure that a minimum recovery of 100% aerial coverage and 85% density compared to preconstruction levels is met.

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 3 Regarding potential visual impacts, the property is not located at a turnaround along West Shore Road, and there is no visual easement over the property. Views of Richardson Bay from the public street are limited in this area due to existing homes and mature landscaping. Therefore, the proposed waterfront improvements would not substantially interfere with or obstruct the public's view of the Bay. Conformance with Belvedere Municipal Code Title 19 - Zoning Staff has reviewed the project for conformance with applicable Development Standards and finds that the project meets all applicable R-lW Development Standards, as summarized in BMC Section 19.24.060. Title 20 - Architectural and Environmental Design Review The proposed waterfront improvements are subject to the design review criteria and standards set forth in BMC Sections 20.04.005 and 20.04.110 through 20.04.210, addressed below. More importantly, the proposed improvements (pier, pilings, gangway, boat lift and floating dock) are also subject to the design review criteria and standards in Section 20.06 of the Belvedere Municipal Code, which contains restrictions for the design, use and maintenance of new piers, gangways, floats, hoists and buoys installed in the R-1 W (West Shore Road) Zoning District. These restrictions were developed based on input received from a citizen committee, an independent engineering consultant, a contract lawyer, and letters from members of the public. A draft ordinance was initially brought to the City Council in January 1999, and after several revisions, the final Ordinance was passed in September of that year. As outlined in BMC Section 20.06.010, the purpose of these regulations are: (1) To ensure that waterfront property owners on West Shore Road have reasonable access to the offshore area through the use of buoys, piers and related structures; (2) To minimize hazards and clutter created by such structures; and (3) To minimize their interference with the views and privacy of neighboring property owners. Staff believes that the proposal conforms to the applicable criteria set forth in Title 20, as outlined below. Floating Dock. The proposed floating dock (float) would be 8' X 29' (232 sq. ft.) and is proposed to be plastic or closed cell foam with a hardwood surface (Pau Lope). The float would be more than 5 feet from the (west) side property line and would be secured by three new piles, and would be accessed from the existing pier via the proposed gangway (see below). Two story poles were installed to show the location of the outer comers of the proposed floating dock, as shown on Sheet A 1.1. Per BMC Section 20.06.0SO(B), floats shall not encroach into the side yard setback or come closer than five feet from the extended side property lines of each parcel. No structure except a float shall extend beyond the rear property line. Staff finds that the proposed float meets the criteria set forth in Ch. 20.06, including setback requirements, maximum size of 240 sq. ft. and a minimum of two pilings to secure it into position. Piles. As discussed above, three (3) new steel piles are proposed to support the floating dock. Based on the submitted plans, the height of the piles would be approximately + 13 MLL W, just

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 4 below the rail height of the existing pier, and below the maximum +14 MLL W established in BMC Section 20.06.050(F). Staff finds that the proposed pilings meet the applicable standards set forth in Ch. 20.06. Gangway and Railing. A gangway is proposed to provide access to the proposed floating dock described above. The gangway is proposed to be galvanized steel with open metal railing (1 Yi­ inch diameter galvanized steel). The length of the gangway would be approximately 20 feet, which is less than the maximum length of 30 feet allowed by BMC Section 20.06.050(G). In addition, the code requires that railings and pickets on piers and gangways be constructed so as to minimize visual impact to neighboring properties, while still meeting building code standards. The code also requires that piers, gangways, floats and railings be finished in neutral, nonreflective colors approved by the Planning Commission as part of the design review approval. Since the gangway and railing is proposed to be metal, the Planning Commission should consider whether galvanized steel is an appropriate material for the proposed gangway. Decking. The submitted plans do not specify the type of decking (walking surface) proposed for the gangway; however, it is assumed to be metal. In any case, depending on the results of preconstruction eel grass surveys required by Mitigation Measure BI0-2 and the requirements of wildlife and permitting agencies, there may be a requirement for the gangway decking (walking surface) to be made of a light transmitting material that is at a minimum 40% transparent, as recommended by CDFW. One option is to use a composite decking material with a slotted surface that allows for light transmittance. As noted in the attached Initial Study, eelgrass beds are known to be present along the shallow waters of West Shore Road. The use of light­ transmitting materials is recommended for any structures that may shade eelgrass. This is important because eelgrass is a plant (not seaweed) that requires a certain amount of sunlight to survive. Eelgrass is not a threatened or endangered species; however, it is a spawning ground for Pacific herring and is an important habitat for other aquatic wildlife. Staff finds that as conditioned the proposed railing and decking meet the applicable standards set forth in BMC Ch. 20.06, and Mitigation Measure BIO-I. Boat Lift. The Design Review application was amended in December 2015 to include a request to install a boat lift that would attach to the east side of the existing metal pier. The proposed lift is a fork lift-cantilever style hoist with a maximum lifting capacity of 6,000 lbs., which is the maximum allowed by BMC Section 20.06.060 Hoists. This section also stipulates that no hoist shall extend into a side yard setback, unless a variance therefor is granted by the City. Note: for the purposes of this project, boat hoists are considered the same as boat lifts. The proposed new boat lift would conform to all standards identified in BMC Section 20.06.060. However, it is noted that the existing boat lift located along the east side of the property does not conform to the adopted standards for boat lifts in the R-1 W district because it extends into the 5- foot side yard setback, and extends beyond the side property line. The applicant has indicated that the existing boat lift is to remain. As noted previously, Staff has not found any permit or approval documents associated with the existing boat lift, and BMC Section 20.06.060(B) states that no more than two boat hoists may be located beyond the rear deck of the house. The proposed new boat lift would be located beyond the rear deck of the house. The existing boat lift is located along the side yard, but not beyond the rear deck. Furthermore, there is a provision in this section of the Code which states that this section does not apply to any existing hoist, even if rebuilt or replaced after adoption of the ordinance codified in this Section. (Bel. Mun. Code, §

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 5 20.06.020.) Although no documents were found to indicate that a variance was approved for the existing boat lift, it appears to have been in place for some time. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that the proposed boat lift complies with all applicable standards. In conclusion, staff finds that all proposed marine-related improvements, as conditioned, would conform to the standards of Belvedere Municipal Code Chapter 20.06. Design Review Findings The Design Review findings, specified in the Belvedere Municipal Code, Chapter 20.04, state that all new structures and additions should be designed to avoid excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and should not attract attention to themselves. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. Landscaping should soften and screen structures and maintain privacy. As conditioned, staff is able to make the required findings for Design Review as stated in the draft resolution of approval (Attachment 3), and as follows: Preservation of existing site conditions. To preserve the landscape in its natural state, the removal of trees, vegetation, rock, and soil should be kept to a minimum. Projects should be designed to minimize cut and fill areas, and grade changes should be minimized and kept in harmony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. The existing use and site conditions will be preserved. No portion of the existing residence or existing landscaping will be modified or removed as a result of this project. The proposed improvements would be in harmony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. In addition, piers, gangways and floating docks are common features of shoreline homes in the project's immediate vicinity. Relationship between structures and the site. There should be a balanced and harmonious relationship among the structures on the site, between the structures and the site itself, and between the structures and those on adjoining properties. AU new buildings or additions constructed on sloping land should be designed to relate to the natural landforms and step with the slope in order to minimize the building mass and bulk and to integrate the structure with the site. The project presents a balanced and harmonious relationship between the site, other structures, and adjoining properties. All work associated with this project relate to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. No changes or additions to the existing home or landscaping are proposed as part of this project. The proposed floating dock, gangway and boat lift will be used for private recreational use as allowed by the Belvedere Municipal Code. Marine structures such as those that are proposed are typical of waterside development along West Shore Road. As explained above, as conditioned, the project design conforms to the requirements contained in Belvedere Municipal Code Chapter 20.06, which outlines standards for installation of floating docks, gangways and lifts on West Shore Road.

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 6 A. All new structures and additions should be designed to avoid monumental or excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and not designed to draw attention to themselves. As noted above, all work associated with this project relates to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. The character of the project relates to and is similar with similar improvements in the neighborhood. No changes or additions to the existing home or landscaping are proposed as part of this project. All proposed marine structures are compatible with the existing character of the site and the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed floating dock, gangway and boat lift would not appear excessively large, and would remain compatible with the size and scale of marine structures on other properties in the neighborhood. B. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided, and large single plane retaining walls should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. As noted above, all work associated with this project relates to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. No changes or additions to the existing home, and no retaining walls or landscaping are proposed as part of this project. The proposed improvements are intended to blend in, keep a low profile and minimize the visual impacts to neighbors, as required by Belvedere Municipal Code Chapter 20.06, which outlines standards for installation of piers, gangways, and boat lifts on West Shore Road. Materials and colors used. Building designs should incorporate materials and colors that minimize the structures visual impacts, that blends with the existing landforms and vegetative cover, that relate to and fit in with structures in the neighborhood, and that do not attract attention to the structures themselves. Soft and muted colors in the earthtone and woodtone ranges are preferred and generally should predominate. Trim and window colors should be compatible with and complementary to the other building colors. As conditioned and as described in project plans, the project utilizes materials that conform to regulations in effect to protect biological resources (i.e. no creosote-treated wood). These materials will be compatible with the surrounding structures, and will relate to and fit in with the neighborhood. Marine structures such as those that are proposed are typical of residential development in the project vicinity. BMC Section 20.06.0SO(B) requires that piers, gangways, floats and railings be finished in neutral, nonreflective colors approved by the Planning Commission as part of the design review approval. Since the propos~d gangway is proposed to be galvanized steel, the Planning Commission should consider whether is an appropriate material for the proposed gangway. Fences and screening. A. Fences and physical screening should be located so as to be compatible with the design of the site and structures as a whole, should conceal and screen garbage areas, mechanical equipment, and structural elements from public view, should preserve privacy between adjoining dwellings, where practical, and should not significantly block views. Not applicable. No fences are proposed and no screening is recommended or deemed necessary to comply with applicable standards.

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 7 B. Fences should be designed and located so that they are architecturally compatible with the design of the building, are aesthetically attractive, and do not significantly block views. Wire or chain link fences are discouraged, except as temporary barriers on construction sites. Not applicable. No fences are proposed. Furthem10re, the project will retain important public views from nearby public path and other public vantage points, as identified in the City's General Plan 2030. Privacy. Building placement, and window size and placement should be selected to give consideration to the privacy of adjacent buildings. Not applicable. The project does not propose any buildings with windows, or modifications to size or placement of existing windows. Drives, parking and circulation. Walkways, driveways, curb cuts and off-street parking should be planned and designed so as to minimize interference with smooth traffic flow, to encourage separation of pedestrian from vehicular traffic, and to be as safe and convenient as is practical. They should not be out of relationship with the design of the proposed buildings and structures on the site, and should not intrude on the privacy of, or conflict with the appearance or use of neighboring properties. Not applicable. No changes to parking, drives or circulation are proposed. Exterior lighting, skylights, and reflectivity. Exterior lighting should not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or to passersby. Lighting should be shielded and directed downward, with location of lights coordinated with the approved landscape plan. Skylights should not have white or light opaque exterior lenses. Not applicable. No exterior lighting or skylights are proposed as part of this application. Consideration of nonconformities. The proposed work shall be viewed in relationship to any nonconformities, as defined in Title 19, and where it is determined to be feasible and reasonable, consideration should be given to conditioning the approval upon the mitigation or elimination of such nonconformities. _It is noted that the existing boat lift located along the east side of the property does not conform to the adopted standards for boat lifts as contained in Chapter 20.06 because it extends into the 5- foot side yard setback, and it extends beyond the side property line. As noted previously, staff has not found any permit or approval documents associated with the existing boat lift. Furthermore, the standards contained in Chapter 20.06 of the BMC doe not apply to any existing hoist, even if rebuilt or replaced after adoption of the ordinance codified in this Section. (Ord. 2000-1 § 1, 2000; Ord. 99-6 § 1 (part), 1999.). Given that no documents were found to indicate that a variance was approved for the existing boat lift, the existing lift may be considered nonconforming. However, staff is not aware of any concerns regarding the existing lift. Therefore, consideration should be given as to whether elimination of the existing lift would be of any benefit. Landscape plans -- Purpose. A. Landscape plans should be compatible with the character of the site and surrounding developed properties. Native or natural appearing vegetation, with generally rounded, natural forms, should be placed to appear as loose, informal clusters. B. Landscape plans

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 8 shall include appropriate planting to soften or screen the appearance of structures as seen from off-site locations and shall include appropriate screening for architectural elements, such as building foundations, deck supports, and retaining walls, that cannot be mitigated through architectural design. C. Landscape plans should provide privacy between properties. Choice of landscape materials should take into consideration the future impact which new planting may have in significantly obstructing views from nearby dwellings. Not applicable. No changes to landscaping are proposed. Landscape Plans - Materials. A. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and those that are drought-tolerant are encouraged. Evergreen species are encouraged for use in screen planting situations. Because of high water usage, turf areas should be minimized and narrow turn areas, such as in parking strips, should be avoided. B. Landscape plans should include a mix of fast and slow growing plant materials. Fast growing trees that have a short life span should be used only when planted with others which reach maturity at a later age. C. Landscape plans should include water conserving irrigation systems. Plant materials should be selected so that once established, much of the major site landscaping would survive solely on rainfall. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and those that are drought tolerant, are encouraged. Because of high water usage, turf areas should be minimized and narrow turf areas, such as in parking strips, should be avoided. Not applicable. No changes to landscaping are proposed. Overall, staff finds the proposed waterside improvements appropriate for the property, and typical of those found along West Shore Road waterfront properties. However, as noted above, the Planning Commission should consider whether galvanized steel is an appropriate material for the proposed gangway given that the Code calls for neutral, nonreflective colors to be used for piers, gangways, floats and railings. In addition, the Planning Commission should consider whether it is appropriate to consider the existing boat lift nonconforming and whether the project should be required to mitigate or eliminate the nonconformity. Staff has prepared the attached draft resolution of approval that addresses the required findings for Design Review (Attachment 3). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a California law that applies to any discretionary project requiring approval by a state or local government agency. The purpose of CEQA is to identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced, and to prevent environmental damage by requiring changes in projects through the use of feasible alternatives and mitigation measures. An Initial Study/Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and circulated for public review and comment in October 2015. In December 2015, the project application was revised to include a request to install a new boat lift, and the Initial Study/MND was revised and recirculated to address the boat lift. While the Initial Study addresses all topics required by CEQA, the focus of the study is on potential impacts to biological resources (mainly eelgrass beds) and potential aesthetics impacts, including scenic resources, views and visual character of the site. As discussed above, Chapter 20.06 of the Belvedere Municipal Code contains regulations for the size, design, height, and placement of marine-related structures "to minimize

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 9 hazards and clutter" from such structures and "to minimize interference with the views and privacy of neighboring property owners." These requirements speak directly to potential aesthetics impacts, and conformance with these requirements serves to mitigate potential impacts, as addressed further in the Initial Study. Potential impacts on eelgrass are summarized below, and addressed in more detail in Section IV of the Initial Study. Most new structures that cover the San Francisco Bay are considered new "fill" by various regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over the Bay (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, BCDC). Some of the improvements included in this Design Review application meet the definition of fill; and they have the potential to impact eelgrass beds, which are known to exist in the project vicinity and other clear, shallow waters of Richardson Bay. Any fill or structure that shade eelgrass beds from the sun can adversely affect them because eelgrass is a plant (not seaweed) that requires a certain amount of sunlight to survive. Eelgrass is not listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). However, because eelgrass is a spawning ground for Pacific hening and is an important habitat for other aquatic wildlife, eelgrass beds are regulated by CDFW through the CEQA process. Eelgrass may not be cut or disturbed (California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 30.10) and is considered Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Because eelgrass beds are located in the vicinity of where construction activities for this project would take place, the potential exists for adverse effects on this sensitive natural community. Due to its impact on the Eelgrass beds, the Initial Study found that the project has a significant adverse environmental impact that requires mitigation. Mitigation measures are identified in the Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) that would reduce this potential impact to less-than-significant. The mitigation measures include the requirement for pre-construction surveys to determine if eelgrass beds are present within the area of potential impact, and identify Environmental Work Windows and construction methods recommended by CDFW for in-water construction activities, consistent with the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy (L TMS) and CDFW permit requirements. The Initial Study is included as Attachment 5. CORRESPONDENCE A copy of the public hearing notice for this item was published in The Marin JJ newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. As of the writing of this report, a letter from the Richardson Bay Audubon Center & Sanctuary was received on November 9, 2015 in response to the notice of intent to adopt the mitigated negative declaration for the project. The letter (Attachment 7), states that based on surveys conducted for the National Marine Fisheries Service by Merkel & Associates in 2003, 2009 and 2014, it is likely that said improvements would negatively affect eelgrass that is present at this location due to shading and direct impacts of the new pilings. A map showing GIS data from 2003 and 2009 eelgrass surveys by Merkel & Associates is attached to the letter. The letter indicates that although the 2014 survey report has not been widely published, Merkel stated in a recent email that "eelgrass was definitely still present in this area in 2014."

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 10 After receiving this letter, staff reviewed the draft Initial Study/MND to determine if any revisions were warranted based on the information contained in this letter. Staff also contacted CDFW to discuss the adequacy of the proposed mitigation measures in light of the comments contained in the letter. Based on the conversation with CDFW, it is staffs opinion that the draft Initial Study/MND adequately addresses potential impacts to eelgrass and that mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND would mitigate impacts to a less-than-significant level. No changes or revisions to the IS/MND are recommended or proposed. CONSTRUCTION TIME LIMIT Pursuant to section 20.04.035 of the Belvedere Municipal Code, the applicant is required to file an estimate of the total project cost that will establish the time limit within which construction of the proposed project will be completed pursuant to the Municipal Code. Here, the applicant has estimated that the cost of construction for this project would be less than $100,000. When applied to the above noted section of the Code, construction shall be completed six (6) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit. CONCLUSION As conditioned, staff can make all of the required findings for the Use Permit and Design Review Permit and finds that the project complies with the City's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan policies, provided that the Planning Commission finds that galvanized metal is an appropriate material. Findings required to approve the project are included in the attached resolution (Attachment 2). RECOMMENDATION MOTION! Adopt Resolution adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration that addresses proposed waterside improvements including floating dock, gangway and boat lift on property located at 91 West Shore Road (Attachment 1); and

MOTION2 Adopt Resolution granting Design Review approval for proposed waterside improvements including floating dock, gangway and boat lift on property located at 91 West Shore Road, with conditions (Attachment 2).

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Draft Resolution for CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachment 2: Draft Resolution for Design Review Permit Attachment 3: Applications, Project Description and Supplemental Information Attachment 4: Plans date-stamped January 11, 2016 by the City of Belvedere Attachment 5: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, revised December 2015 Attachment 6: Department I Agency Comments Attachment 7: Correspondence

91 West Shore Road - January 19, 2016 PC Meeting Page 11 CITY OF BELVEDERE RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELVEDERE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN PREPARED PURSUANT TO CEQA FOR WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A FLOATING DOCK, GANGWAY AND BOAT LIFT AT 91 WEST SHORE ROAD (APN 060-303-15)

WHEREAS, a proper application for Design Review has been submitted pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code for waterside improvements on _property located at 91 West Shore Road; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study, Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan, attached and incorporated herein, have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which determined that the mitigations, voluntarily agreed to by the property owner and incorporated into the project scope, reduce the potential environmental impacts of the project to a level of less than significant; and WHEREAS, the Plaiming Commission has reviewed ai1d considered the Initial Study, Draft Mitigated Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan and finds that the mitigation measures effectively mitigate the project's potential environmental impacts to a level of less thai1 significant; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by trustee and responsible agencies; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plai1 on January 19, 2016; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Plam1ing Commission of the City of Belvedere does hereby adopt the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan dated December 14, 2015. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on January 19, 2016 by the following vote:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: APPROVED:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Marsha Lasky, Planning Commission Chair

Alison Foulis, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF BELVEDERE RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELVEDERE GRANTING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO ALLOW WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING FLOATING DOCK, GANGWAY AND BOAT LIFT AT 91 WEST SHORE ROAD (APN 060-303-15)

WHEREAS, a proper application for Design Review has been submitted pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code for waterside improvements on prope1iy located at 91 West Shore Road; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which detem1ined that project scope, as mitigated, would have a less than significant impact on the enviromnent; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the requested Design Review application on January 19, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, based upon the findings set fo1ih in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, that with the conditions listed below, the proposed project is in substantial conformance with the Design Review criteria specified in sections 20.04.005, and 20.04.110 to 20.04.210 and 20.06 of the Belvedere Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Belvedere does hereby grant approval of the Design Review application pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code for waterside improvements including floating dock, gangway and boat lift on property located at 91 West Shore Road, with the following conditions: a) The property owner shall hold the City of Belvedere and its officers harmless in the event of any legal action related to or arising from the granting of this Design Review approval, shall cooperate with the City in the defense of any such action, and shall indemnify the City for any award of damages and/or attorneys' fees and associated costs that may result. b) Plans submitted to the Building Department for permit issuance shall be consistent with the approved Planning Commission plans. c) Construction and installation shall conform to drawings prepared by Holscher Architecture, stamped received by the City of Belvedere on January 11, 2016. d) The general contractor shall submit a proposal to the City Manager, for review and approval, addressing the schedule for construction and parking locations for construction vehicles. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall update the Construction Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Building Official. e) In the event Tribal Cultural Resources are discovered during any construction activities, Project personnel shall halt all activities in the immediate area and consult with a qualified archaeologist to determine the appropriate course of action.

ATTACHMENT 2 Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 Page 2

f) Design Review approvals expire eighteen (18) months from the date of approval. This Design Review approval expires on July 19, 2017. g) Construction shall be completed within the Construction Time Limit established for this project. Floating Dock h) Uncovered Styrofoam or molded expanded polystyrene foam (MEPS) flotation billets shall not be permitted or used for floating dock. i) Boats may be water berthed at float on a temporary basis only. Boat Lift j) Any boat maintained in a hoist shall be maintained at an elevation no higher above the water than necessary for the safe hoisting of the boat, but in no event shall a hoisted boat exceed a height of fourteen feet above MLL W, measured to either the gunnels, the top of the cabin, or the bottom of the windshield, whichever is higher. k) Boats in hoists may be lifted higher than the maximum permitted height of + 14 MLL W on a temporary basis during storm activity, as necessary for the protection of the boat, providing, however, that as soon as practicable following the threat of storm activity, the hoisted boat shall be lowered to the maximum hoisted height permitted. Mitigation Measures 1) Mitigation Measure BI0-1: To mitigate the potential for adverse effects on aquatic habitat from in-water construction activities, the applicant shall incorporate construction requirements identified in the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy (LTMS) into project plans and specifications. In-water construction requirements may include the following: • Silt curtains shall be implemented to contain suspended sediments from project activities. • Light-transmitting materials that are a minimum 40% transparent shall be used in any part of the structure that may shade eelgrass. • Pile driving shall be conducted with the use of a vibratory hammer to avoid acoustic impacts to marine species. If the use of a vibratory hammer is not feasible, all impact pile driving within San Francisco Bay shall use sound attenuation measures, such as a wood cushion and/or air bubble curtains. Impact pile driving shall conform to CDFW' s Interim Criteria Thresholds for Injury to Fish, which states that sound pressure levels should not exceed 206 decibels (dB) peak and 183 dB accumulated sound exposure level at ten meters from the source of impact. Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 Page 3 • In-water construction periods shall be restricted to the Environmental Work Windows identified in the LTMS. These work windows are generally: - Eelgrass beds - June 1 to November 30 - Steelhead trout/chinook salmon - June 1 to November 30 - Pacific herring - March 1 to November 30 - Dungeness Crab -July 1 to April 30 - Coho Salmon - June 1 to October 31 Responsible Party: City Planner Reporting/Project Compliance: City Planner, CDFW m) Mitigation Measure BI0-2: To mitigate the potential for disturbance of eelgrass beds from the proposed project, the applicant shall implement the following measures recommended by CDFW: (a) Conduct a preconstruction survey. The applicant shall conduct a survey of the entire project area prior to the beginning of construction. The survey requirements are as follows:

• The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with previous experience conducting such surveys. • The survey shall be conducted during the active eelgrass growth season from April to October. The survey will be valid for 60 days. • The survey shall comply with all survey recommendations of the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines prepared by NMFS West Coast Region, October 2014. • The survey results shall be provided to CDFW upon completion for review. (b) If eelgrass is present and disturbance cannot be avoided, prepare and implement a monitoring and mitigation plan. If survey results indicate that eelgrass is present and disturbance of eelgrass beds cannot be avoided, the applicant shall prepare a monitoring and mitigation plan as follows:

• A monitoring and mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist with experience in surveying, monitoring, and implementing eelgrass mitigation plans. • A post-construction eelgrass survey and assessment of impacts shall be completed in the same month as the preconstruction survey during the next growing season immediately following the completion of the project, or within the first 30 days of completion of construction if within the active growth period. The post­ construction survey shall document adverse impacts to eelgrass and any changes in density and extent of vegetative cover. The post-construction survey and impact assessment shall be conducted in compliance with all recommendations of the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines prepared byNMFS West Coast Region, dated October 2014. Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 Page4

GI The affected area shall be monitored for a period of no less than 2 years following construction.

GI Eelgrass beds shall reach a minimum recovery of 100% aerial coverage and 85% density compared to preconstruction levels. • If the affected eelgrass mitigation areas have not met the recovery criteria described above at the end of the 2-year monitoring period, additional mitigation will be required in consultation with CDFW to meet the final mitigation ratio of 1: 1. (c) Comply with in-water construction limitations of the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy. The applicant shall limit in-water construction in and around eelgrass beds shall be restricted to the Environmental Work Window of March 1 to November 30. Responsible Party: City Planner Reporting/Project Compliance: City Planner, CDFW

n) Mitigation Measure N-1: Noise Control Plan. In conformance with General Plan Policy N-1.3, the project sponsor/prope1iy owner and/or contractors shall create and implement a noise control plan specific to the proposed project, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Building and Planning Departments prior to issuance of a building pennit and enforced through City inspections. The project sponsor/property owner and/or contractors may elect any combination of legal, nonpolluting methods to maintain or reduce noise impacts to levels at or less than 75 Ldn, as measured 50 feet from the location of pile driving and other construction activity. Responsible Party: City Planner and Building Official Reporting/Project Compliance: Submittal noise control plan; inspection during construction o) These Conditions of Approval shall be printed on the Building Pem1it Construction Plan set of drawings.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on _____, by the following vote:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: APPROVED: Marsh------a Lasky, Planning Commission Chair

ATTEST: Alison ------~Foulis, City Clerk Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 EXHIBIT A Page 1

DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS: The Design Review findings, specified in the Belvedere Municipal Code, Title 20, state that all new structures and additions should be designed to avoid excessively large dwellings which are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and should not attract attention to themselves. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided. Ve1iical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. Landscaping should soften and screen structures and maintain privacy. As conditioned, the required findings for Design Review are made as follows: Preservation of existing site conditions. To preserve the landscape in its natural state, the removal of trees, vegetation, rock, and soil should be kept to a minimum. Projects should be designed to minimize cut and fill areas, and grade changes should be minimized and kept in harmony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. The existing use and site conditions will be preserved. No portion of the existing residence or existing landscaping will be modified or removed as a result of this project. The proposed improvements would be in hannony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. In addition, piers, gangways and floating docks are common features of shoreline homes in the project's immediate vicinity. Relationship between structures and the site. There should be a balanced and harmonious relationship among the structures on the site, between the structures and the site itself, and between the structures and those on adjoining properties. All new buildings or additions constructed on sloping land should be designed to relate to the natural landforms and step with the slope in order to minimize the building mass and bulk and to integrate the structure with the site. The project presents a balanced and harmonious relationship between the site, other structures, and adjoining properties. All work associated with this project relate to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. No changes or additions to the existing home or landscaping are proposed as part of this project. The proposed floating dock, gangway and boat lift will be used for private recreational use as allowed by the Belvedere Municipal Code. Marine structures such as those that are proposed are typical of waterside development along West Shore Road. As explained above, as conditioned, the project design confo1ms to the requirements contained in Belvedere Municipal Code Chapter 20.06, which outlines standards for installation of floating docks, gangways and lifts in the R-1 W District. A. All new structures and additions should be designed to avoid monumental or excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and not designed to draw attention to themselves. Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 EXHIBIT A Page 2

As noted above, all work associated with this project relates to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. The character of the project relates to and is similar with similar improvements in the neighborhood. No changes or additions to the existing home or landscaping are proposed as prui of this project. All proposed marine structures are compatible with the existing character of the site and the sun-ounding neighborhood. The proposed floating dock, gangway and boat lift would not appear excessively lru·ge, and would remain compatible with the size and .scale of marine structures on other properties in the neighborhood .. B. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided, and large single plane retaining walls should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. As noted above, all work associated with this project relates to waterside improvements constructed over riprap or Richardson Bay. No chru1ges or additions to the existing home, and no retaining walls or landscaping are proposed as part of this project. The proposed improvements are intended to blend in, keep a low profile and minimize the visual impacts to neighbors, as required by Belvedere Municipal Code Chapter 20.06, which outlines standards for installation of piers, gangways, and boat lifts in the R-1 W District. Materials and colors used. Building designs should incorporate materials and colors that minimize the structures visual impacts, that blends with the existing landforms and vegetative cover, that relate to and fit in with structures in the neighborhood, and that do not attract attention to the structures themselves. Soft and muted colors in the earthtone and 'voodtone ranges are preferred and generally should predominate. Trim and window colors should be compatible with and complementary to the other building colors. As conditioned ru1d as described in project plans, the project utilizes materials that confonn to regulations in effect to protect biological resources (i.e. no creosote-treated wood). These materials will be compatible with the stmounding structures, and will relate to and fit in with the neighborhood. Marine structures such as those that are proposed are typical of residential development in the project vicinity. BMC Section 20.06.0SO(B) requires that piers, gangways, floats and railings be finished in neutral, nomeflective colors approved by the Planning Commission as part of the design review approval. Since the proposed gangway is proposed to be galvanized steel, the Planning Commission should consider whether is an appropriate material for the proposed gangway. Fences and screening. A. Fences and physical screening should be located so as to be compatible with the design of the site and structures as a whole, should conceal and screen garbage areas, mechanical equipment, and structural elements from public view, should preserve privacy between adjoining dwellings, where practical, and should not significantly block views. Not applicable. No fences are proposed and no screening is recommended or deemed necessary to comply with applicable standards. Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 EXHIBIT A Page 3

B. Fences should be designed and located so that they are architecturally compatible with the design of the building, are aesthetically attractive, and do not significantly block views. Wire or chain link fences are discouraged, except as temporary barriers on construction sites. Not applicable. No fences are proposed. Furthermore, the project will retain impo1tant public views from nearby public path and other public vantage points, as identified in the City's General Plan 2030. Privacy. Building placement, and window size and placement should be selected to give consideration to the privacy of adjacent buildings. Not applicable. The project does not propose any buildings with windows, or modifications to size or placement of existing windows. Drives, parking and circulation. Walkways, driveways, curb cuts and off-street parking should be planned and designed so as to minimize interference with smootb traffic flow, to encourage separation of pedestrian from vehicular traffic, and to be as safe and convenient as is practical. They should not be out of relationship with the design of the proposed buildings and structures on tbe site, and should not intrude on the privacy of, or conflict with the appearance or use of neighboring properties. Not applicable. No changes to parking, drives or circulation are proposed. Exterior lighting, skylights, and reflectivity. Exterior lighting should not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or to passersby. Lighting should be shielded and directed downward, with location of lights coordinated with the approved landscape plan. Skylights should not have white or light opaque exterior lenses. Not applicable. No exterior lighting or skylights are proposed as pmi of this application. Consideration of nonconformities. The proposed work shall be viewed in relationship to any nonconformities, as defined in Title 19, and where it is determined to be feasible and reasonable, consideration should be given to conditioning the approval upon the mitigation or elimination of such nonconformities. It is noted that the existing boat lift located along the east side of the property does not conform to the adopted standards for boat lifts as contained in Chapter 20.06 because it extends into the 5- foot side yard setback, and it extends beyond the side prope1iy line. As noted previously, the applicant has indicated that the existing boat lift is proposed to remain. Staff has not fotmd any permit or approval documents associated with the existing boat lift. Fmthermore, the standards contained in Chapter 20.06 of the BMC do not apply to any existing hoist, even if rebuilt or replaced after adoption of the ordinance codified in this Section. (Ord. 2000-1 § 1, 2000; Ord. 99-6 § 1 (pmi), 1999.). Given that no documents were found to indicate that a variance was approved for the existing boat lift, the existing lift may be considered nonconfonning. However, staff is not aware of any concerns regarding the existing lift. Therefore, it does not appear that there would be any benefit to requiring removal of the existing lift. Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 EXHIBIT A Page4

Landscape plans -- Purpose. A. Landscape plans should be compatible with the character of the site and surrounding developed properties. Native or natural appearing vegetation, with generally rounded, natural forms, should be placed to appear as loose, informal clusters. B. Landscape plans shall include appropriate planting to soften or screen the appearance of structures as seen from off-site locations and shall include appropriate screening for architectural elements, such as building foundations, deck supports, and retaining walls, that cannot be mitigated through architectural design. C. Landscape plans should provide privacy between properties. Choice of landscape materials should take into consideration the future impact which new planting may have in significantly obstructing views from nearby dwellings. Not applicable. No changes to landscaping are proposed. Landscape Plans - Materials. A. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and those that are drought-tolerant are encouraged. Evergreen species are encouraged for use in screen planting situations. Because of high water usage, turf areas should be minimized and narrow turn areas, such as in parking strips, should be avoided. B. Landscape plans should include a mix of fast and slow growing plant materials. Fast growing trees that have a short life span should be used only when planted with others which reach maturity at a later age. C. Landscape plans should include water conserving irrigation systems. Plant materials should be selected so that once established, much of the major site landscaping would survive solely on rainfall. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and tbose that are drougbt tolerant, are encouraged. Because of higb water usage, turf areas sbould be minimized and narrow turf areas, sucb as in parking strips, sbould be avoided. Not applicable. No changes to landscaping are proposed. Chapter 20.06, Standards for I11stallatio11 of Buoys, Piers, Gangways, Floats, Hoists and Related Structures on West Shore Road. The Planning Commission finds that the project substantially conforms to the regulations set forth in Chapter 20.06 of the BMC, as outlined below. Floating Dock. The size of the floating dock is 232 sq. ft., which is below the maximum of 240 sq. ft. size established in BMC Ch. 20.06. Materials are plastic or closed cell foam with a hardwood surface (Pau Lope). The float is located more than 5 feet from the (west) side property line and is secured by three new piles, and accessed from the existing pier via the proposed gangway. Pilings. Three (3) new steel piles are proposed to support the floating dock. The height of the piles would be approximately + 13 MLL W, just below the rail height of the existing pier, and below the maximum+ 14 MLL W established in BMC Section 20.06.0SO(F). Resolution 2016- 91 West Shore Road January 19, 2016 EXHIBIT A Page 5

Gangway and Railing. The proposed galvanized steel gangway will extend out from the existing steel pier to provide access to the floating dock. The gangway is approximately 20 feet, which is less than the maximum length of 30 feet allowed by BMC Section 20.06.050(0). The open metal railing (1 Yz-inch diameter galvanized steel) will minimize visual impacts to neighboring properties, while still meeting building code standards. Decking. Proposed decking meets the applicable standards set forth in BMC Ch. 20.06, with the condition that should proposed decking have the potential to shade eelgrass, an alternative light­ transmitting material with a minimum 40% transparency shall be used for the decking surface of gangway and float. Alternative materials include but are not limited to a composite decking material with a slotted surface to allow light transmittance. Boat Lift. The proposed boat lift is a fork lift-cantilever style hoist with a maximum lifting capacity of 6,000 lbs., which is the maximum allowed by BMC Section 20.06.060 Hoists. The lift would attach to the east side of the existing metal pier and would be set back more than five feet from the side property lines. The proposed lift complies with all applicable standards. Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW CITY OI< BELVEDERE • PLANNING COMMISSION 450 SAN RAFAEL A VE • BELVEDERE, CA 94920-2336 PH. 415-435-3838 • FAX 415-435-0430 • WWW.CITYOFBELVEDERE.ORG

Planning Comm. Approval )le·· Design Review Exception 'D Staff Approval D

Does this P.roject have an active building permit? No 1ZJ Yes D Permit No.: _____ Does this project have Planning Commission approval? No IZl Yes D Addressof Property:_9_1_W_e_s_t_S_h_or_e_R_o_a_d______Record Owner of Property: _G_a_r_d_ne_r_B_a_ld_w_i_n ______

Mailing 91 West Shore Dr. Daytime Phone:------

Address: Belvedere, CA. 94920 Fax: ______~

Email:------­ Owner's Representative: David Holscher - Holscher Architecture Mailing 1550 Tiburon Blvd #V Daytime Phone: _4_1_5-_4_3_5-_5_2_19______Address: Belvedere, CA. 94920 Fax: 415-435-0312 Email: [email protected]

Project Description: Applicant requests approvals to allow the following improvements: • New 29' X 8' floating dock (232 sq. ft.) supp01ted by three (3)new steel piles. • New 4' X 26' gangway (104 sq. ft.) to connect floating dock with existing galvanized steel pier; gangway is proposed to have vertical metal railing painted to match railing along existing deck; and

New boatlift (max lifting capacity of 6,000 lbs.) to be installed on tfze soutfzeast side of tfze existing steel pier.

Design Review Application • Page I of 9 • City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\serverlflat\A-FORMS\Belvederelplanning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-l I .doc A'ITACHMENT ___j _ Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

ZONING PARAMETERS: Required Existing Proposed

Lot Area ...... 12544 sqft Lot Coverage ...... Total Floor Area ...... Front Yard Setback ... . Left Sideyard Setback ... . Right Sideyard Setback ... . Rear Yard Setback .... . 43'-2" (@ dock) 20'-0" (@ dock) Building Height Maximum .. . Building Height Average .. . Parking Spaces ......

(To Be Completed by Applicant) Date Filed:------­ General Information I. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: _D_a_v_id_H_o_l_sc_h_e_r ______2. Address of project: _9_1_W_e_s_t_S_h_o_re_R_oa_d______3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: ______David Holscher - 1550 Tiburon Blvd. #V

4. Indicate number of the permit application for the project to which this form pertains: _0_1 ______5. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: _.;...;N""/A...;..______

6. Ex~tingzoningd~~ct:_R_-_1w______

7. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed): _(_N_) _D_O_C_K______

8. Year built: UN-KNOWN Original architect: _u_N_-_K_N_O_W_N______Project Description 9. Site size. _1_2_54_4_S_O_FT______10. Square footage. _N_l_A ______11. Number of floors of construction. _0_2 ______12. Amount of off-street parking provided. _0_2 ______

13. P~nsattached? _Y_E_S------~

Design Review Application• Page 2of9 •City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\tlat\A-FORMS\Belvedere\planning\APPLICA TION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-1 l.doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

14. Proposed scheduling . ..;.;M=A...:.:R...;.C;:;..;...;H-=2=-=0'-'-1..=.6______

15. Associated projects, such as required grading or staging. ..._N.._/A'-'------

16. Anticipated incremental development. ..;;..N'""/A;....;______17. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. _0"""1'------18. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities . ..:..N.:.:./!..:A'------19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. -"-N=-/A:....:______

Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). Yes No 20. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hills, or substantial alteration of D Ill ground contours. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. D Ill 22. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. D Ill 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. D Ill 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. D Ill 25. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing D Ill drainage patterns. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. D Ill 27. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. D Ill 28. Use of, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or D Ill explosives. 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). D Ill 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). D Ill 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. D Ill 32. Changes to a structure or landscape with architectural or historical value. D Ill 33. Changes to a site with archeological or cultural value such as midden soil. D Ill

Environmental Setting 34. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. RESIDENTIAL

35. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one­ family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set- back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. RESIDENTIAL

Design Review Application • Page 3 of 9 • City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvederelplanning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-1 J.doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

For Design Review applications not requiring a building permit this form does not apply. Design Review approvals expire twelve (12) months from the date of approval.

This Section advises you of the Time Limit Guidelines that are applied to all Design Review applications that require a building permit as prescribed by Section 20.04.035 of the Belvedere Municipal Code. "As part of any application for Design Review, the applicant shall file a reasonable estimate of the cost of the proposed construction, and based thereon, a construction time limit shall be established for the project in accordance with Section 20.04.035(b) of the Belvedere Municipal Code. Compliance with such time limit shall become a condition of design review approval." The maximum time for completion of construction shall not exceed six months for additions and remodeling up to $100,000 in value; 12 months for construction up to $500,000 in value; and 18 months for construction valued at more than $500,000. Failure to complete construction in the agreed upon time will result in fines ranging from $400 per day to $800 per day with a $200,000 maximum penalty. Application for an extension of the prescribed time limit can be made providing certain conditions are met. The maximum extension is 6 months. The time for completion of the construction shall also be indicated on the building permit.

In the space provided below please indicate the estimated project valuation.

Estimated cost of construction: $_2_6_·0_0_0_·0_0______Based on the above estimated project valuation, check one of the following Time Limit Guidelines that shall apply to your project:

D 1. For new construction, the demonstrable value of which is estimated to be less than $500.000. Construction shall be completed twelve (12) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit.

D 2. For new construction, the demonstrable value of which is estimated to be more than $500.000. Construction shall be completed eighteen (18) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit.

[Z] 3. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at less than $100.000. Construction shall be completed six (6) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit.

D 4. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at less than $500.000. Construction shall be completed twelve (12) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit.

D 5. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at more than $500.000. Construction shall be completed eighteen (18) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit.

For those projects that do not fall under any of the above Time Limit Guidelines or wish to exceed the time limit that was approved by the Planning Commission, the following outlines the "Extension of Construction Time Limit" (20.04.0350) process:

Design Review Application• Page 4 of9 •City of Belvedere

\ISERVER-PC\serverlflat\A-FORMS\Belvedere\planning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-I I .doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

1. Within twelve months following the original approval of Design Review for the construction, and provided that no construction activity has yet commenced on the project, the applicant may apply for an extension of the established construction time limit, not to exceed an additional six months.

2. An application for an extension of the construction time limit shall be accompanied by complete working drawings for the construction, a written explanation of the reasons for the requested extension, and a fee, as established by City Council resolution.

3. Within 10 working days of receipt of a complete application for extension, said application shall be reviewed by a committee consisting of the City's Building Official, the City Planner, and the City Engineer, meeting together with the project contractor, architect, and, at the applicant's option, the applicant and/or any other representatives of the applicant. At the completion of such review, the committee shall make a recommendation to the Planning Commission whether to approve the requested extension.

4. The committee's recommendation shall be placed on the next available Planning Commission agenda and noticed as an amendment to the applicant's existing Design Review approval. Any modification by the Planning Commission of the original construction time limit shall not extend the existing expiration date of the Design Review approval.

5. Administrative extension. Within 1O working days of receipt of a complete application for extension, said application shall be reviewed by a committee consisting of the City's Building Official, the City Planner, and the City Engineer, meeting together with the project contractor, architect, and, at the applicant's option, the applicant and/or any other representatives of the applicant. The committee may recommend to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission may approve, an extension if it is determined that any one or more of the following factors presents an unusual obstacle to complying with the standard construction time limit: a.Site topography; b. Site access; c. Geologic issues; d. Neighborhood considerations; e. Other unusual factors. At the completion of such review, the committee shall make a written recommendation to the Planning Commission whether or not to approve the requested extension and setting forth the findings it has made justifying its decision. The Committee shall have the authority to administratively approve requests for extension, subject solely to the guidelines of Paragraphs 2 and 3 above, provided however that such extensions do not result in a construction time line exceeding 18 months.

This Section advises you of the costs that may be involved in processing Planning-related applications and/or appeals. You are hereby requested to acknowledge this information and agree to be responsible for all expenses incurred in the processing of your application(s)/appeal(s).

As the property owner/appellant, you agree to be responsible for the payment of all costs, both direct and indirect, associated with the processing of the applications(s)/appeals(s) referenced below. Such costs may be incurred from the following source: Hourly billing costs as of July 1, 2008, (subject to change without notice): Planning Manager $ 67.07 Assistant Planner $ 39.29 City Attorney $ 185.00 Specialized Planning Consultant Actual costs + 25% overhead

Design Review Application • Page 5 of 9 • City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvedere\planning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7- l 1.doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

For all applications and appeals, an initial deposit is required at the time of submittal, with the amounts determined by City Council resolution. In addition to the initial deposit, the property owner/appellant may be required to make further deposits for anticipated work. Invoices are due and payable within 15 days. Application(s) /or appeal(s) will not be placed on an agenda until these deposits are received.

This Section applies to all projects that receive design review. It has been found that there are often misunderstandings regarding changes to building plans that receive Design Review. This occurs when construction plans are submitted to the Building Department for permit issuance after planning approval has been achieved. Another common occurrence is a change to the project while it is underway without first obtaining an approval from the City for the deviation from the original plan.

To help your project proceed in an expeditious and harmonious manner, the City of Belvedere wishes to inform you of several basic understandings regarding your project and its approval. By you and your representative signing this document, you are acknowledging that you have read, understand, and will comply with each of the points listed.

1. Once Design Review approval has been granted, construction plans may be submitted to the City. The construction plans shall be identical to the plans approved for design review. (Authority: Belvedere Municipal Code Section 20.04.010). Deviations from the plans approved for Design Review cannot be approved except by an amendment to the Design Review approval. It is the applicants' responsibility to assure conformance, and the failure of staff to bring nonconformities to the applicants' attention shall not excuse the applicant from such compliance. 2. Comments from City staff regarding the project shall neither be deemed official nor relied upon unless they are in writing and signed by the City Manager or his designee. 3. Without the prior written approval of the City, construction on the project shall not deviate in any manner, including but not limited to form, size or color, from approved construction plans. If at any time during construction, and without such written approval, construction on the project is found by a member of City staff to deviate from the approved construction plans in any manner, an official STOP WORK ORDER will be issued by the City, and there shall be a total cessation of all work on the project. 4. If such a STOP WORK ORDER is issued, the City may initiate proceedings to impose administrative penalties or nuisance abatement proceedings and issue an order to show cause, which will compel the undersigned property owner to appear before the City Council and show cause why the work performed does not deviate from the approved plans and why such work should not be condemned as a public nuisance and abated. (Authority: Belvedere Municipal Code Chapters 1.14 and 8.12)

Story Pole Requirement

Preliminary Story Poles sufficient to indicate the height and shape of the proposed structure or additions shall be placed on the site at least twenty (20) days prior to the first meeting date at which this application will be heard. Final Story Poles must be placed at the site at least ten (10) days prior to the first meeting date and removed no later than ten (10) days following the final city action on the

Design Review Application • Page 6 of 9 • City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvedere\planning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-11.doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road project application. Story poles shall be connected at their tops with colored tape or ribbon to clearly indicate ridges, eaves, and other major elements of the structure.

Limit on the Number of Administrative and Planning Commission Design Review Approvals

Pursuant to Belvedere Municipal Code Section 20.04.020(8)(1)(a), for a site or structure with no existing active Design Review approval, during any twelve-month period, an applicant may obtain up to four administrative approvals, which may be in the form of either Staff Approval, Design Review Exception, or a combination of the two. However, there is no limit to the number of times an applicant may apply for Planning Commission Design Review. Any such administrative or Planning Commission Design Review approval(s) shall be valid for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of approval, unless a building permit has been issued for the project within said twelve (12) month period, in which case the Design Review approval shall be valid as long as there is an active building permit for the project.

Once a project has been approved by Planning Staff or the Planning Commission, administrative approvals to amend the existing active Design Review approval for that project shall be limited to three such approvals at any time during the lifetime of the underlying Design Review approval, plus one such approval during the process of obtaining final inspection approval of the project. Any such administrative approval(s) granted shall NOT extend the twelve (12) month term, of the underlying Design Review approval, or the building permit construction time limit if a building permit has been issued for the project.

All property owners must complete and sign the section below which is applicable to your property.

Street address of subject property: _9_1 _W_E_S_T_S_H_O_R_E_R_D______

Assessor's Parcel No(s). of subject property: _0_60_-_30_3_-_15______> Properties Owned by a Trust, LLC, Corporation, Partnership, or Other Entity

Please provide proof of ownership and of the signer's authority to enter into contracts regarding this property. One of (or a combination of) the following documents may contain the necessary information. For trusts: the trust document or a certificate of trust, including any attachments thereto; property deed; certificate of title insurance. For other entities: articles of incorporation; partnership agreement; property deed; certificate of title insurance; written certification of facts by an attorney. Photocopies are acceptable. To ensure privacy, documentation will be shredded in a timely manner, or, upon request, returned to the applicant. I, GARDNER BALDWIN , state under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above-described subject property is owned by a trust, LLC, corporation, partnership, or other entity and that my signature on this application has been authorized by all necessary action required by the LLC, corporation, partnership, or other entity.

I hereby make application for approval of the design review requested. I have read this application and hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for the design review and initial environmental evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief Design Review Application• Page 7 of9 •City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvedere\planning\APPLICA TION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-11.doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

I agree to be responsible for all costs incurred in connection with the processing of my application and appeals, if any. And I agree to be bound by Section 5, "Acknowledgement of Responsibilities," above and representations one through four contained therein.

In the case of an application for revocable license, I agree that, upon approval by the City Council of the revocable license requested, I will promptly execute a license drafted by the City, have it notarized, and return it to the City so that it may be recorded.

I understand that the contents of this document are a Public Record.

, 20~, at··.BBe:hde9e rn~ California Signat~Jf~· Title(s) U#!!~'f,

D Trustee(s) D Partners: D Limited or D General D Corporation

Name of trust, LLC, corporation, or other entity: ------J:-,

)- Properties Owned by Individuals GARDNER BALDWIN . I, , state under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the record owner of the above-described subject property.

I hereby make application for approval of the design review requested. I have read this application and hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for the design review and initial environmental evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief

I agree to be responsible for all costs incurred in connection with the processing of my application and appeals, if any. And I agree to be bound by Section 5, "Acknowledgement of Responsibilities," above and representations one through four contained therein.

In the case of an application for revocable license, I agree that, upon approval by the City Council of the revocable license requested, I will promptly execute a license drafted by the City, have it notarized, and return it to the City so that it may be recorded.

I understand that the contents of this document are a Public Record.

Design Review Application • Page 8 of 9 • City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvederelplanning\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-l l .doc Project Address: 91 West Shore Road

> Designation of Owner's Representative (Optional) GARDNER BALDWIN h b th . DAVID HOLSCHER I , , ere y au onze ______to file on my behalf any applications, plans, papers, data, or documents necessary to obtain approvals required to complete my projec rther authorize said person to appear on my behalf before the Planning Commission and/or ii. This designation is valid until the project covered by the application(s) is complete , until the designation is rescinded in writing. 02/12/15 Da t e: ______Date: 02/12/15

Design Review Application• Page 9of9 •City of Belvedere

\\SERVER-PC\server\flat\A-FORMS\Belvederelplanning\APPLICA TION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrev4-7-1 I.doc INITIAL STUDY/PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

91 WEST SHORE ROAD - WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENTS

CITY OF BELVEDERE MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2015

R EVISED D ECEMBER 14, 2015

Prepared for:

City of Belvedere Planning Department 450 San Rafael A venue Belvedere, CA 94920-2336

Contact: Jayni Allsep, Planning Consultant 415.706.0443 or 415.435.3838

ATTACHMENT 5 City of Belvedere

(this page left intentionally blank)

Revised December Geffi6ef 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BCDC San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act dB decibel EFH Essential Fish Habitat EIR environmental impact report FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map ISIMND initial study/mitigated negative declaration LTMS San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy MCSTOPPP Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program MLLW mean lower low water NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum 1988 NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board UBC Uniform Building Code USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WRA Wetland Research Associates

Revi sed December G€fe.9ef 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Title: 91 West Shore Road - Waterfront Improvements 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Belvedere, 450 San Rafael Avenue, Belvedere, CA 94920-2336 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jayni Allsep, Planning Consultant, 415-706-0443 4. Project Location: 91 West Shore Road , Belvedere, CA 94920; APN 060-303-15 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Gardner Baldwin , 91 West Shore Road, Belvedere, CA 94920

6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density 3.1-to 6.0 units per acre 7. Zoning: R-1 W (Residential-West Shore Road Area) 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if needed.) Applicant requests approvals to allow the following improvements:

New 29' X 8' floating dock (232 sq. ft.) supported by three (3) new steel piles. _. _ New 4' X 26' gangway (104 sq. ft .) to connect floating do.ck with existing galvanized steel pier; gangway is proposed to have vertical metal railing painted to match railing along existing deck; and

New boatlift (max lifting capacity of 6,000 lbs.) to be installed on the southeast side of the existinq steel pier. The three new piles would be installed via barge-mounted crane. A pile driving barge would be brought to the site via Richardson Bay. All other equipment is proposed to be staged from the shore and all other structural lumber would be installed via hand labor from the shore.

Project approvals required by the City of Belvedere include an Architectural and Environmental Design Review pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code, and a building permit (assuming permit approvals from other agencies are granted). 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located within the West Shore Road Area, an established Briefly describe the project's neighborhood comprised of single-family residences, and is immediately adjacent surroundings: and partially within Richardson Bay. The subject property is developed with a two-story home, garage, fence, mature landscaping , and a steel pier built in 1994. Other properties on the bayside of West Shore Road are similarly developed, including waterfront improvements such as piers, gangways and floating docks. The shoreline along West Shore Road is riprap along the foreshore area, which provides shore protection from wind-generated wave action from the north and west directions. There is no public access to Richardson Bay from West Shore Road; however; to the east of the site is a seawall path that runs along San Rafael Avenue, and connects to the multi-use path that runs along Tiburon Boulevard and is part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. 10: Other public agencies U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), San Francisco Bay Conservation and whose approval is Development Commission (BCDC), California Fish and Wildlife Service (CDFW), required: San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement)

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Rev i sed December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 City of Belvedere

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

D Aesthetics D Agriculture and Forestry Resources D Air Quality

D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology I Soils

D Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Hydrology I Water Quality

D Land Use / -Planning D Mineral Resources D Noise

D Population I Housing D Public Services D Recreation

D Transportation I Traffic D Utilities I Service Systems D Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D

I find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and D an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or D "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect l) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 3 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative o'eclaration City of Belvedere

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the D environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 City of Belvedere

Exhibit 1 - 91 ·West Shore Road - Project Location

Revised December G€tel3eF 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 5 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Exhibit 2 - Existing and Proposed Conditions

Plans Prepared by Holscher Architecture, October 28 December 7, 2015

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Re v ise d Dece mber 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 6 l.'Wl/11.'IJ.-.fl.\ ff ll'

l<.P. 060-30.J-22

~Ll

[ ,

0 ~

'- . - ~ - ~~.~--· - · - - '"';;;" J [ij. ~ WEST SHOR E RO AD LJ HOLSCHER... CJ

ARCHITECTURE

1550~8o.Jevr.I B.rvtdn. CaM.mJitOlO

phone -• 1i435.S21t= tu 41 i .OS.C31 2

l ~Tf\ "'I DOCl WU Ii CONSlt'..C!U> O'Jl'OF 'MM.Ol'E 2. AUMCT>.:.WU l ? Ol'rC> C>J.VA.~ l. lffJGffl'Olnol'O UD ~ e•. l'AIOvt'.liALIW ( •U J'MIAH W uvru .•.uo Ofl frfGVD· ltlt IU.ntM " I JHI MAVOOAIUM) @E~~,1, ~.c:: SITE PLAN Baldwin Residence ' L:J' - (NJ Dock

flWeJISnoteRd. &et-1ede

Existing & Proposed Site Pion

Al.O HOLSCHER .... CJ

ARCHITECTURE

\ 1550 Tb.r.ll\ B.'.JJMr.I 61Mdn. CalbrU 9'920

ALIGN TO (E) DECK plln '15.US..$219 w -m.us.ro12- 45'-10''

TREX FLOATING DOCK ~ PLASTIC OR CLOSED CELL FOAM LOCATION OF FLOATING FOAM Baldwin Residence - (N) Dock

~ u

0 '

GATE 9IWe1tsnoreRd. 9. (NI ATE 9.1 set~e.CA ,;, APN : ~lOl-1.5 "' ~ IEI STEEL DOCK EL. 9.1' ~ Proposed 5·.zy· - Dock& 9.0 9.1 9 .1 9. Story Pole . I Plan ' ' ~ I I ' (N)·66AH'iff-'--' ' ~ (E) 26'-4¥.,- '

NOIE: I. fh1DOC~WUl ! C (lf~ IWCTU>OUTOf,A'.HOl'I: :t l l. #tlGKrOtllOf'OUOIMnOVUUNf•t.1• .uovt-'ltllf @\~.~?,~ED FLOATING DOCK/STORY POLE PLAN (-Ul'MIA/# UAUVll ll.UlOOHNGYD • ltlfOA.1\111111 POLE# HEIGHT' l fUHAVDOAIVMJ 1 6.1' (-3'-0" FROM (E) DOCK) 2 6.1' (-3'-0" FROM (E) DOCK)

REFERENCE TO (E) DOCK @ 9.1' to«i t :S41(;.2015 ---A 1.1 f.-1'-• HOLSCHER v o~ l ~ • O . eooo A i ·:~~J :- "'1 1 Eoat Lilt, /no. = ARCHITECTURE

1550 lb.tol ~Yi! lietitciM.c.cm.smo

pt'Cl'll 4\S. 4JS.!.ll9 lu -•1 S.4JS.03-12

~~" !.·~~"'.": .lfA. .'.r:' .n.~~ .~~\~. : ' !~~'.':'.':' . AHOUUOOfflfalHAVDOAFUM) Baldwin !I y 4J liJ Residence i i i i - (N) Dock

BOAT LIFT CUT SHEET

Q;:t!';>,;._?,~ED NORTH WEST ELEVATION NOTE: 1. (NJ OQCI( Will BE CONSTRUCTED OUT Of PAlJ.lOPE 2 AllMETAlwtllBEOPPEOGAJ.VANIZED 91 We1tSholeRd. aetvedere.CA 3. HEJGHTOF f•OfOSEO IMfaOVEMEHTO 9. J' .AIOVE MUW APrl:060-30l-1S (·2.55'MEANSEA1EVELIA.SEOOHHGVO · 1929DAJUM & 19U NAVO DATUM} Proposed Dock Elevations SC:olo lf•"• 1'4'

PROPOSED I EXISTING i --·,-----·-·--·---·-·-·--·---·-·---·---·

jobr:S.11>201S Q~~;._?,~ED SOUTH EAST ELEVATION A2

~------~ c...... ,.01111 __ ,.,_ City of Belvedere

I. Aesthetics

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic D D ~ D vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, D D D ~ including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual D D D character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare D D D which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Discussion The project site at 91 West Shore Road is located within an established residential area known as the West Shore Road neighborhood. Like other properties along West Shore Road that have bayshore frontage, the subject property has approximately 80 feet of water frontage along Richardson Bay. The property is developed with a single-family residence, garage, deck, landscaping and a galvanized steel/wood pier, built in 1994. Piers, floating docks and gangways are common features of waterfront properties along West Shore Road- most residences on the bayside of West Shore Road have a pier, gangway, floating dock and/or boat lift. The properties at 89 and 93 West Shore Road, both adjacent to 91 West Shore Road, are developed with similar facilities, including a pier, gangway, boat lift and floating dock, similar in size and scale to the waterfront improvements proposed at 91 West Shore Road. City ofBelvedere General Plan 2030 The City's General Plan includes policies intended to protect and maintain views from open space areas where views are enjoyed, including the following: Policy REC-1.3: Maintain existing public access to the shoreline. Existing access is satisfactory and should not be diminished. Existing access consists of the pathway along San Rafael Avenue, sidewalk along Beach Road, open shoreline on tide lots in Belvedere Cove, and the steps of the Harry B. Allen Lane to Belvedere Cove.

Revised December G€febef- 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 11 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Policy REC-1.4: Maintain views from Belvedere's scenic streets, especially San Rafael Avenue and Beach Road. Waterfront properties along West Shore Road enjoy speCtacular views of San Francisco and Richardson Bays, along with varying views of Mount Tamalpais, Sausalito and the San Francisco Skyline. View easements have been established at the turnaround points along West Shore Road to provide a public view from the street to the water. The subject property, located near the end of West Shore Road, is not located at one of these turnaround points, and is not subject to a view easement. The waterfront improvements proposed at 91 West Shore Road would not substantially interfere with or obstruct the public's view of the Bay, as viewed from West Shore Road. Due to the site's location, surrounding topography, and existing mature trees, the visual impact of proposed waterside improvements are not significant as viewed from public vantage points along West Shore Road and other public streets. The proposed improvements would not detract significantly from the scenic views of the area, because piers, gangways. boal lifts and floating docks are part of the existing character of the shoreline along West Shore Road. Proposed improvements are similar to and compatible with waterside improvements on adjacent properties along West Shore Road, which include piers, gangways, floating docks and boat lifts. The proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Views of the Bay from the West Shore Road right of way, to the extent that they exist, would not be substantially obstructed by the proposed project. The quality of the view from the bayside would not change substantially because the shoreline along this segment of West Shore Road is already dominated by piers, boat lifts. gangways and floating docks. The addition of new gangway. boat li ft and floating dock would result in a less than significant impact on visual resources. The project does not propose ariy new lighting or materials that would cause significant glare. Therefore, no significant impacts to a scenic vista, scenic resource, visual character or quality of the subject site or its surroundings, or light or glare would result from the project. . Views from Private Property

Improvements related to maritime activities such as docks, decks, boatlifts, and floats are an important aspect of many Belvedere properties. Over 200 lots in Belvedere are partially located in or have direct access to Richardson Bay or Belvedere Cove. Section 20.06 of the Belvedere Municipal Code contains restrictions for the design, use and maintenance of new piers, gangways, floats, hoists and buoys installed in the R-1 W 0N est Shore Road) Zoning District. The Rl-W-specific design restrictions were developed based on input received from a citizen committee, an independent engineering consultant, a contract lawyer, and letters from members of the public. A draft ordinance was initially brought to the City Council in January of 1999 and after several revisions the final Ordinance was passed in September of that year. The restrictions create objective standards aimed at protecting views and privacy between neighbors.

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€ffibef..Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 12 City of Belvedere

The height, size, and material components of the project will be reviewed pursuant to Chapter 20.06 Standards for Installation of Buoys, Piers, Gangways, Floats, Hoists and Related Structures on West Shore Road. Chapter 20.06 contains regulations for the size, design, height, and placement of such structures "to minimize hazards and clutter" from such structures and "to minimize interference with the views and privacy of neighboring property owners" (Chapter 20.06.010, Findings). Therefore, any potential project impacts to aesthetics would be less than significant.

II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than­ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or D D D Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non­ agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural D D D use or a Williamson Act contract?

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause D D D rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section l 104(g))?

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 13 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

D D D d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

e) Involve other changes in the existing D D D environment which, due to their location of nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Discussion No agricultural uses or activities will be adversely affected by the project as there is no Prime Farmland nor are there any agricultural uses within the City of Belvedere. The project site is a residential parcel, and would continue to be utilized as such after project completion. Therefore, the project would have no impact on agriculture or forest resources.

Ill. Air Quality

Less Than Potentially Less-Than- Significant With ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated III. Air Quality.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the D D D applicable air quality plan?

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute D D D substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net D D D increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial D D D pollutant concentrations?

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€ffibef-Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 14 City o(Belvedere

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a D D D substantial number of people?

Discussion The proposed project is consistent with the June 2010 Belvedere General Plan. Operation of the land uses anticipated by the General Plan were found to be at a level of development already anticipated by the Bay Area Clean Air Plan and the Ozone Attainment Plan. 1 As such, the General Plan does not conflict with or obstruct either of these plans. The General Plan also contains Policy SUST-13.1, which requires construction to utilize Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) performance­ based best management practices. Installation and use of a-pter, gangway. boat I ift and floating dock is not associated with any significant source of construction- or operation-related air pollution or odors. Therefore, implementation of the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality plan, result in a violation of air quality standards, result in a significant increase in criteria pollutants, result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollutants, or result in the creation of objectionable odors.

IV. Biological Resources

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than­ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated IV. Biological Resources. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly D D D or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special­ status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian D D D habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of

1 Operational emissions, including mobile and area sources, typically represent the majority ofa project's air quality impacts. After a project is built, operational, are anticipated to occur continuously throughout the project's lifetime. Operational -related activities, such as driving, use of landscape equipment, and wood burning, could generate emissions ofcriteria air pollutants, CHG, TA Cs, and PM. Area sources generally include fuel combustion from space and water heating, landscape maintenance equipment, and fireplaces/stoves, evaporative emissions from architectural coatings and consumer products and unpermitted emissions from stationary sources.

Revised December G€teber 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 15 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally D D D protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any D D D native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances D D D protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted D D D Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

Discussion The project site is in Richardson Bay, an important wildlife habitat, particularly for migratory fish, due to eelgrass beds found in the clear, shallow water of parts of Richardson Bay. Birds such as pelicans, ducks, and cormorants thrive on the abundance of food and areas of undeveloped shoreline. Eelgrass is not listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). However, because eelgrass is a spawning ground for Pacific herring and is important habitat for other aquatic wildlife, eelgrass beds are regulated by CDFW through the CEQA process. Eelgrass may not be cut or disturbed (California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 30.10) and is considered Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

2 Based on preliminary consultation with California Fish and Wildlife , the project site is on top of an existing eelgrass bed that extends along a good portion ofWest_sffi€-Shore Road. The [floating] dock may have potential direct and indirect impacts to eelgrass from pile driving and additional shading from the proposed gangway. boat li ft and floating dock. Based on this initial assessment. CDFW recommends that +!he applicant should perform a pre-construction eelgrass survey to determine if impacts will result from the proposed expansion~ and provide the survey info rm ati on ts-to the wildlife and permitting

2 Email communication from Arn Aarreberg, Environmental Scientist, California Department of Fish and Wildlife - Marine Region, March 25, 2015

I 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€tebef-Revi se d December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 16 City of Belvedere

agencies for review prior to the start of construction. If impacts are determined to occur, a monitoring and mitigation reports should be prepared for review and approval by the wildlife and permitting agencies. In addition, all decking should be made of a light transmitting material that is at a minimum 40% transparent. 3

Because eelgrass beds are located in the vicinity of where construction activities would take place, the potential exists for adverse effects on this sensitive natural community identified by CDFW. For example, shoreline structures built over the water can prevent eelgrass from getting enough light for growth. This impact is potentially significant, and mitigation is required, as listed below (see Mitigation Measure BI0-1 ).

Most new structures that cover the Bay are considered new "fill" by various regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over the Bay. The biological impacts of small amounts of new fill within Richardson Bay were reviewed by for consistency with the Richardson Bay Special Area Plan, adopted by the Belvedere City Council in 1985, and with General Plan policies for recreation and open space. This analysis of environmental impacts was sent to CDFW and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for their review and comment.

The new fill that would result from the proposed project is located along a riprap shoreline of Richardson Bay. Piers, gangways, boa t li fts and floating docks are common features of the shoreline homes in the project's immediate vicinity along West Shore Road. The proposed project would add -3+9 324 square feet of new "fill" as summarized below:

Proposed Structure Area (sq. ft.) Floating Dock 232 Gangway 87 Boat Lift 5 Total New Fill ~324

As required by Mitigation Measure Bio-1 below, if eelgrass is determined to be present in the construction area, light-transmitting materials shall be used in all parts of the structure that have the potential to shade eelgrass. Additional mitigation for in-water construction activities is identified below.

In-water Construction Activities. In-water construction activities have the potential to adversely affect aquatic species and habitats, which would be a potentially significant impact requiring mitigation.

3 Email from Arn Aarreberg, Environmen.tal Scientist, Marine Environmental Review and Water Quality Project, California Department of Fish and Wildlife - Marine Region, March 25, 2015

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 17 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Mitigation Measure BI0-1: Incorporate LTMS Construction Requirements into Project Plans and Specifications.

To mitigate the potential for adverse effects on aquatic habitat from in-water construction activities, the applicant shall incorporate construction requirements identified in the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy (LTMS) into project plans and specifications. In-water construction requirements may include the following:

• Silt curtains shall be implemented to contain suspended sediments from project activities.

• Light-transmitting materials shall be used in any part of the structure that may shade eelgrass. • Pile driving shall be conducted with the use of a vibratory hammer to avoid acoustic impacts to marine species. If the use of a vibratory hammer is not feasible, all impact pile driving within San Francisco Bay shall use sound attenuation measures, such as a wood cushion and/or air bubble curtains. Impact pile driving shall conform to CDFW's Interim Criteria Thresholds for Injury to Fish, which states that sound pressure levels should not exceed 206 decibels (dB) peak and 183 dB accumulated sound exposure level at ten meters from the source of impact. • In-water construction periods shall be restricted to the Environmental Work Windows identified in the LTMS. These work windows are generally: - Eelgrass beds -June 1 to November 30 - Steelhead trout/Chinook salmon-June 1 to November 30 - Pacific herring-March 1 to November 30 - Dungeness Crab - July 1 to April 30 - Coho Salmon - June 1 to October 31 Responsible Party: City Planner Reporting/Project Compliance: City Planner, CDFW Implementation of Mitigation Measure BI0-1 would reduce the impact of in-water construction from the project on aquatic species and habitats to a less-than-significant level because in-water construction would take place only during the periods and using methods recommended by CDFW. Eelgrass beds. Eelgrass is not listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or CDFW. However, because eelgrass is spawning ground for Pacific herring and is important habitat for other aquatic wildlife, eelgrass beds are regulated by CDFW through the CEQA process. Eelgrass may not be cut or disturbed (California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 30.10) and is considered Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€ffibef-Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 18 City of Belvedere

Because eelgrass beds are known to be present in the vicinity of the project site, the potential exists for adverse effects on this sensitive natural community that is identified by CDFW. This impact is significant, and mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measure BI0-2: Implement CDFW-Recommended Measures to Avoid Disturbance of Eelgrass Beds.

To mitigate the potential for disturbance of eelgrass beds from the proposed project, the applicant shall implement the following measures recommended by CDFW:

(a) Conduct a preconstruction survey. The applicant shall conduct a survey of the entire project area prior to the beginning of construction. The survey requirements are as follows:

• The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with previous experience conducting such surveys. • The survey shall be conducted during the active eelgrass growth season from April to October. The survey will be valid for 60 days.

• The survey shall comply with all survey recommendations contained in the of Appendix B, "Recommendations Concerning Sun'cys for Assessing In-:pacts to Eelgrass,'' of the Draft California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines prepared by NMFS Southwest Region, dated Dccen1bcr 7, '1Q l l October 2014. • The survey results shall be provided to CDFW upon completion for review . (b) If eelgrass is present and disturbance cannot be avoided, prepare and implement a monitoring and mitigation plan. If survey results indicate that eelgrass is present and disturbance of eelgrass beds cannot be avoided, the applicant shall prepare a monitoring and mitigation plan as follows:

• A monitoring and mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist with experience in surveying, monitoring, and implementing eelgrass mitigation plans. • A post-construction eelgrass survey and assessment of impacts shall be completed in the same month as the preconstruction survey during the next growing season immediately following the completion of the project, or within the first 30 days of completion of construction if within the active growth period. The post-construction survey shall document adverse impacts to eelgrass and any changes in density and extent of vegetative cover. The post-construction survey and impact assessment shall be conducted in compliance with all recommendations of the Appendix C, "Recommended Measures for ,\sscssing Impacts to Eelgrass," of the Draft California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines prepared by NMFS Southwest Region, dated December 7, 20 11October 2014. • The affected area shall be monitored for a period of no less than 2 years following construction . • Eelgrass beds shall reach a minimum recovery of 100% aerial coverage and 85% density compared to preconstruction levels.

Revise d Dece mber GEffibef. 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 19 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

• If the affected eelgrass mitigation areas have not met the recovery criteria described above at the end of the 2-year monitoring period, additional mitigation will be required in consultation with CDFW to meet the final mitigation ratio of 1: 1. (c) Comply with in-water construction limitations of the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Strategy. The applicant shall limit in-water construction in and around eelgrass beds shall be restricted to the Environmental Work Window of March 1 to November 30. Responsible Party: City Planner Reporting/Project Compliance: City Planner, CDFW

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BI0-2 would reduce the impact of the project on eelgrass beds to a less-than-significant level because eelgrass beds would be avoided or protected and/or mitigation would be implemented as recommended by CDFW. v. Cultural Resources

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated v. Cultural Resources. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the D D D significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the D D D significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique D D D paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those D D D interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Discussion The subject property at 91 West Shore Road is identified as having medium sensitivity for both prehistoric and historic resources, based on the cultural resources evaluation prepared as part of the City of Belvedere General Plan update in 2009.

While some submerged soils could be disturbed and covered by the proposed installation of three new piles, this would be a very localized soil disturbance, and one that requires no excavation. Significant Native American archaeological sites have been identified within the City of Belvedere. The project site is located near known portions of CA-Mm-39, which is a large shellmound that has been found to contain artifacts and human remains. CA-Mm-39 has been found to contain a great amount of

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 20 City of Belvedere information pertaining to the life and ways of the prehistoric inhabitants of Belvedere Island. However, the proposed location of the waterfront improvements is not within the area identified by Archeological Resource Service as belonging to CA-Mrn-39. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, and the request from the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) in the letter dated July 1, 2015, the City of Belvedere notified FIGR of the proposed project on August 30, 2015, and provided a written project description and plans describing the proposed improvements. As of the date of distribution of this Initial Study, FIGR has not requested consultation regarding this project. The project does not involve excavation of earth materials, and therefore is not likely to impact known or undiscovered cultural resources. If cultural resources are discovered during project construction, the property owner/project sponsor is required to follow state law regarding disturbance of any existing and previously undiscovered cultural resource, including that the project shall be stopped until a cultural resources evaluation is conducted, and the requirements or recommendations set forth within the evaluation are met.

VI. Geology and Soils

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than­ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as D D D delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to California Geological Survey Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? D D D iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including D D D liquefaction? iv) Landslides? D D D b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of D D D topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is D D D unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on­ or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table D D D 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),

Revised Decembe r ~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 21 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting D D D the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

Discussion The proposed project includes the replacement of an existing wood pier, and installation of a floating dock, boat lift and gangway. The project would not involve the use or addition of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Belvedere is not included in Table No. 4, Cities and Counties Affected by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones as of May 1, 1999, published by the California Geological Survey. This is an updated version of Table 4 from the 1997 edition of Special Publication 42 (Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, by Earl W. Hart and William A. Bryant). The list is current as of May 1999.

The project site is located along the shoreline at 91 West Shore Road. The submerged portion of the parcel is assumed to have geotechnical and soil characteristics similar to the above-water portions of the parcel. As shown in the General Plan, 91 West Shore Road has low land.slide susceptibility but a high potential for seismic settlement, liquefaction, ground lurching, erosion, and tsunami inundation. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project design must be found by the Building Department to conform to the current standards for earthquake-resistant construction and other potential hazards, including the UBC, for seismic safety. Conformance with the UBC would reduce any potential impacts from seismic events, unstable, soils, and other hazards to a less-than-significant level.

VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Less Than Significant Potentially with Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporate d VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either D D D directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or D D D regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Discussion The proposed project is consistent with the June 2010 Belvedere General Plan and the greenhouse gas emissions anticipated from implementation of the General Plan fall below the BAAQMD thresholds of significance for greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the General Plan incorporates provisions to

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 22 City of Belvedere

further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In April 2011, the City of Belvedere adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which focuses on the efforts Belvedere can take to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate, to the extent feasible at the local level, the potential impacts of climate change. Most of the policies in the CAP are related to transportation, "green building", energy efficiency and renewable energy. The CAP is not included in the General Plan itself, but integrates the strategies and actions identified in the relevant elements of the General Plan.

Of the many GHG reduction strategies identified in the CAP, the only strategy that is potentially applicable to the proposed project is Goal 3.5.C2, which calls for reducing solid waste disposal to landfills by 25%. For projects that involve demolition of structures or substantial renovation of an existing building, the City requires that contractors demonstrate how this target will be met for construction waste and debris. Because no demolition of existing structures is required for this project, and because very minimal construction debris will be generated, construction waste disposal for this project would be minimal.

Furthermore, installation and use of a floating dock. boat lift and gangway would not generate a substantial source of greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. 4 Based on consultation with BAAQMD staff , due to the relative small scale of proposed improvements and construction activities, and because use of the gangway, boat lift and floating dock would be limited to personal recreational use, GHG emissions associated with the project would be well below the thresholds that signal a significant impact. Therefore, impacts related to GHG emissions, both individually and cumulatively, would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

The proposed project would have no impact on implementation of plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the D . D D environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the D D D

4 Personal Communication with Alison Kirk, Senior Environmental Planner, BAAQMD; July 9, 2015

Revised December GHebff 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 23 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous D D D or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list D D D of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use D D D plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private D D D airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically D D D interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk D D D of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

Discussion The project site is not known to have any hazardous materials or hazardous conditions. No airports, private airstrips, or schools are within Y4 mile radius of the site. The project site is not in a wildland fire hazard risk area. The project would not involve the transportation of hazardous materials or create foreseeable upset and accident conditions. While road closure is not expected during construction and installation of proposed waterfront improvements, any request for road closure would be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Superintendent, to ensure that no interference with emergency response vehicles would occur. Therefore, implementation of the project would not cause a significant impact related to hazardous materials or hazards.

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€ffi9ef-Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 24 City of Belvedere

IX. Hydrology and Water Quality

Less Than Significant Potentially with Less-Than- ENVIRONMENT AL ISSUES Significant Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporate d IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste D D [gJ D discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or D D D l2J interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern D D D of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern D D D of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would D D D exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? D D [gJ D g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard D D [gJ D area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area D D D structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk D D D of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or D D D mudflow?

Revised December Gaeber 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 25 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Discussion The proposed project would not influence groundwater supplies or substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, because the proposed gangway and floating dock would be designed to remain above the water line, and are designed to allow water to flow through, under or around the structures. The design and construction of residential dock and pier improvements are subject to review by the City Engineer and Public Works Department, and are subject to the requirements of the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP). The project requires a water quality certification from the RWQCB for the discharge to waters of the State of California associated with the construction of the new pier and floating dock. City building permit standard requirements include the submission of an erosion control plan, which includes the measures that would be taken to prevent loose dirt and soil from washing into Richardson Bay. Implementation of standard requirements from the City of Belvedere, MCSTOPPP, and RWQCB would ensure that the project does not violate any water quality standards or impair water quality. Therefore, any potential impacts on water quality and water quality requirements attributable to erosion of soils would be less than significant. A seiche is defined as a surface water free or standing wave oscillation that is contained within a partially or completely enclosed basin. Seiche is initiated by some event occurring within the enclosed basin - commonly meteorological (e.g., wind or pressure changes), geologic (e.g., earthquake), or other mass movement such as a surface or subsurface landslide, which results in a sloshing of water within the basin as it reflects off the perimeter of the basin. San Francisco Bay is partially enclosed, with an outlet to the Pacific Ocean via the Golden Gate, and is relatively shallow, with a mean depth of approximately 27.6 feet. Geologic-induced seiche events have not been documented in San Francisco Bay, and meteorological effects are quickly dissipated due to the connection with the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the potential for inundation by seiche is low, as is inundation by mudflow. However, as shown in the City's General Plan, the project site is potentially subject to shoreline inundation and flooding by tsunami and large storms. According the Flood Insurance Rate Maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the project site is located in Zone VE, a high risk coastal area with a 1% or greater chance of flooding and additional hazard associated with storm waves. Current FIRMs establish the base flood elevation (BFE) at the project site at 9 feet NAVD88 (FIRM Panel 06041C0526D effective date 5/4/2009).5 Any new "habitable space" constructed within this zone must be elevated above BFE. The proposed project consists of outdoor waterfront improvements for recreational use, and does not propose the construction of a new dwelling unit or habitable space of any kind.

s FEMA has released Preliminary National Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) dated 3/24/2014. These preliminary maps set the BFE at 13 feet NAVD88 for the area along West Shore Road near the project site. According to FEMA timeline, preliminary FIRMs will become effective in early 2016.

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 26 City of Belvedere

Sea Level Rise Global surface temperature increases are accelerating the rate of sea level rise worldwide through thermal expansion of ocean waters and melting ofland-based ice (e.g., ice sheets and glaciers). Bay water level is likely to rise by a corresponding amount. In the last century, sea level in the Bay rose nearly eight inches. Current science-based projections of global sea level rise over the next century vary widely. In 2010 the California Climate Action Team (CAT) developed sea level rise projections (relative to sea level in 2000) for the state that range from 10 to 17 inches by 2050, 17 to 32 inches by 2070, and 31to69 inches at the end of the century. The CAT has recognized that it may not be appropriate to set definitive sea level rise projections, and, based on a variety of factors, state agencies may use different sea level rise projections. Although the CAT values are generally recognized as the best science-based sea level rise projections for California, scientific uncertainty remains regarding the pace and amount of sea level rise. Moreover, melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet may not be reflected well in current sea level rise projections. As additional data are collected and analyzed, sea level rise projections will likely change over time. The proposed floating dock and gangway, like most marine-oriented structures, must be located on the Bay, and BCDC Climate Change policies encourage small projects provided they do not negatively impact the Bay and do not increase risks to public safety. (BCDC, San Francisco Bay Plan - Climate Change, amended 2011).

x. Land Use and Planning

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated x. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? D D D ~ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, D ~ D D policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat D D D conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

Discussion The project site is comprised of a privately owned residential property located within an established residential area. The property would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. If approved, the project design would comply with all City of Belvedere Zoning Ordinance and Architectural and Environmental Design Review regulations. In addition, the project requires approval by other agencies, including the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, USACE, and BCDC. Receipt of project approval from these agencies would ensure that the project would not conflict with state and federal water quality, hazards,

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 27 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

and biological resources policies and plans. The project conforms to the Richardson Bay Special Area Plan, which would also be confirmed by BCDC through that agency's permitting process.

As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, Mitigation Measure BI0-1 requires that project construction, including pile driving and installation of structures, conforms to the guidelines outlined in the programmatic consultation (known as the "Not Likely to Adversely Affect") issued by USACE, NMFS, and USFWS that cover small activities, including the installation of pilings, in San Francisco Bay and other locations in California. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BI0-3 and the required standard project permitting processes necessary for project approval would ensure that the project would have a less-than-significant impact on land use planning.

XI. Mineral Resources

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant With Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XI. Mineral Resources. Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral D D D resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important D D D mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

Discussion There are no known mineral resources in the City of Belvedere, and therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on mineral resources.

XII. Noise

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant With Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XII. Noise. Would the project result in:

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in D D D excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive D D D groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 28 City of Belvedere

c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels 0 0 0 in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient 0 0 0 noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would 0 0 0 the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Discussion The project proposes waterfront improvements, including installation of a gangway, boat lift and floating dock. The project does not include any outdoor speakers. The use of the pier, gangway and floating dock is required to conform with noise standards in the Belvedere Municipal Code that prohibit the conduct of any loud, unnecessary, or unusual noises between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. Friday and Saturday in such a manner as to be plainly audible at a distance of 50 yards from the structure, vehicle, or premises. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact related to noise. All project construction, including pile driving, would be subject to standard conditions of approval limiting hours of construction. Hours of construction are limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and no work on city holidays. Application of these standard limitations on hours of construction would ensure that any temporary and/or periodic increase in noise from project construction would be limited to less noise-sensitive times of day. However, project construction would still create a temporary and/or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project during construction activities and pile driving. Noise is not absorbed by open stretches of water, allowing it to affect the larger community. According to the General Plan, the maximum noise levels that could be considered potentially compatible with single-family residential land uses is 60 Ldn, with conditionally acceptable levels up to 75 Ldn. The maximum noise level that could be considered potentially compatible with recreation parcels is 65 Ldn, with conditionally acceptable levels up to 80 Ldn. According to the analysis in the General Plan, occasional noise complaints might occur if noise exceeded 65 Ldn, but complaints could more typically be expected at levels over 65 Ldn. According to the Northern Waterfront General Plan Amendment Draft EIR, prepared by Lamphier-Gregory, the noise associated with pile driving can be as loud as 81-96 dBA as measured 50 feet from the project site. For reference, the estimated noise level of

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 29 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

Tiburon Boulevard at Lyford Drive in 1989 was measured at 68 dBA, and any increase of 10 dBA is generally perceived by the human ear as a doubling of noise levels. In order to address the potential for temporary noise and groundborne vibration impacts, the project sponsor/property owner has agreed to incorporate the following mitigation measures into the project. Mitigation Measure N-1: Create and implement a noise control plan.

In conformance with General Plan Policy N-1 .3, the project sponsor/property owner and/or contractors shall create and implement a noise control plan specific to the proposed project, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Building and Planning Departments prior to issuance of a building permit and enforced through City inspections. The project sponsor/property owner and/or contractors may elect any combination of legal, nonpolluting methods to maintain or reduce noise impacts to levels at or less than 75 Ldn, as measured 50 feet from the location of pile driving and other construction activity. Responsible Party: City Planner and Building Official Reporting/Project Compliance: Submittal noise control plan; inspection during construction With implementation of the standard limitations on hours of construction; restrictions on pile driving in Mitigation Measure BI0-1 discussed under Section IV, Biological Resources; and Mitigation Measure N-1 discussed above, potential temporary noise impacts from project construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

XIII. Population and Housing

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XIII. Population and Housing. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an D D D area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing D D D housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, D D D necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 30 City of Belvedere

Discussion The project site is a residential parcel that would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. The single family home would remain; therefore, the project would have no impact on population or housing.

XIV. Public Services

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XIV. Public Services. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? D D D ~ Police protection? D D D ~ Schools? D D D ~ Parks? D D D ~ Other public facilities? D D D ~

Discussion The project site is a residential parcel that would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. The single family home would remain; therefore, the project does not require increased fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities. The project would not obstruct fire district water access to Belvedere Island. Therefore, the project would have no impact on public services.

XV. Recreation

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than­ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XV. Recreation. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and D D D regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

Revised December GHOOer 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 31 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

b) Include recreational facilities or require the D D D construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Discussion The project site is a residential parcel that would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. The project involves the construction and installation of waterfront improvements intended for private recreational use of watercraft. The potential for this project to have an adverse physical effect on the environment is the subject of this initial study. The project sponsor/property owner has voluntarily agreed to incorporate Mitigation Measure BI0-1, as discussed under Section IV, Biological Resources, and Mitigation Measure N-1, as discussed under Section XII, Noise. Therefore, the proposed project, as mitigated, would have a less-than-significant adverse physical effect on the environment from construction of a private recreational facility.

XVI. Transportation/Traffic

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than­ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XVI. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or D D D policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion D D D management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, D D D including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design D D D feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D D

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Revised December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 32 City of Belvedere

f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or D D D programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

Discussion The project site is a residential parcel that would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. The project does not bear influence upon a congestion management program or air traffic patterns. The project does not generate any conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. The project conforms to the pier limit line restrictions, and therefore would not obstruct use of the water by other watercraft. Any staging that would be necessary for project construction will be addressed at the preconstruction meeting between the project contractor, City Building Official, City Public Works Superintendent, and City Engineer. While road closure is not expected, any requests for road closure would be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Superintendent, to ensure no interference with emergency response vehicles. The project would not obstruct fire district water access to Belvedere Island. The proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on transportation and traffic. Furthermore, the project site is not within or near the designated navigation channels identified in the Richardson Bay Special Area Plan. Therefore, the project would have no impact on marine navigation. (RBSAP, Dec 6, 1984, Map 6, p. 49).

XVII. Utilities and Service Systems

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENT AL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XVII. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of D D D the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new D D D water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require onesult in the construction of new D D D storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to D D D

Revised December G€tebef 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 33 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater D D D treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand, in addition to the provider's existing commitments? t) Be served by a landfill with sufficient D D D permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes D D D and regulations related to solid waste?

Discussion The project site is a residential parcel that would continue to be utilized as such at project completion. The project involves the construction and installation of waterfront improvements intended for recreational use of watercraft. The project does not influence existing or proposed stormwater facilities, water supply and wastewater facilities, nor would the project generate significant levels of solid waste. Therefore, the project would have a less-than-significant impact on utilities and service systems.

XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance

Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade D ~ D D the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are D D D individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects D D D

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements ~Rev i sed December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 34 City of Belvedere

that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference, Section 5088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083 .05 , 21083 .3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 2111, Public Resources Code;; Sundstrom v. County ofMendocino,(1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoffv. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.

Discussion The project, with proposed mitigation measures, would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, degrade, the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. For the reasons discussed above in this document, and incorporated in this discussion section, the proposed project, as mitigated, would not generate any significant direct, indirect, or cumulatively considerable impacts on human beings or the environment.

Revised December~ 2015 91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements 35 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Belvedere

REFERENCES Archeological Resource Service. Results of An Archeological Monitoring Program at 10 North Point Circle, on the Site of CA-Mrn-39. Belvedere, Marin County, California. March 2005. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. CEQA Guidelines. June 2010. City of Belvedere. Belvedere General Plan. June 2010. ___. Belvedere Climate Action Plan. April 2011. ___.Belvedere Municipal Code. Title 19, Zoning. ___. Belvedere Municipal Code, Title 20, Architectural and Environmental Design Review. Lamphier-Gregory. Northern Waterfront General Plan Amendment Draft EIR. Table IV.H-4: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels. January 2006.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adm inistration (NOAA) West Coast Region. Cali fornia Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines. October 2014. Available at: h llp ://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/pub lie a tions/habita t/california eelgrass- rn i tigation/F inal %2 OCEMP%200ctobcr%202014/cemp oct 2014 final. pdf San Francisco Bay Development and Conservation Commission. L TMS Management Plan 2001. Available at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/dredging/ltms/ltms_ mgemnt.shtml. ____.Richardson Bay Special Area Plan. 1985. Available at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/ pdf/rbsap/rbsap. pdf. ____.San Francisco Bay Plan. 2011. Available at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/laws_plans/plans/sfbay _plan#3 8. Wetland Research Associates. Eelgrass Survey and Report. September 7, 2010.

APPENDICES Appendix A: Design Review Application, Plans prepared by Holscher Architecture, February 24, 2015; Revised October 28 December 7, 2015.

91 West Shore Road Waterfront Improvements G€te5ef..Revis ed December 2015 Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 36 Javni Allsep City of Belvedere 15 450 San Rafael Ave Belvedere, CA 94920

RE: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for: 91 West Shore Road - Waterfront Improvements, APN 060-303-15:

Dear Javni Allsep,

On behalf of the Richardson Bay Audubon Center & Sanctuary, I would like to comment on the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for Waterfront Improvements planned for 91 West Shore Rd.

Based on surveys conducted by Merkel and Associates for National Marine Fisheries Service and the California Department of Transportation in 2003, 2009 and 2014, it is iikeiy that said improvements would negatively affect eelgrass (Zostero marina) that is present at this location, due to shading and direct impacts of the new pilings.

Please see attached map showing GIS data from 2003 and 2009 survey work (Merkel & Assoc.). Although the 2014 survey report has not been widely published at this time, Merkel stated in a recent email to me that "eelgrass was definitely still present in this area in 2014."

Sin9erely, , h ~V4 !

Enc: map, copy of Notice

CITATiONS:

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2015. San Francisco Bay Eelgrass Inventory October 2014. Prepared for National Marine Fisheries Service. October 2015.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2009. San Francisco Bay Eelgrass Inventory October- November 2009. Prepared for California Department of Transportation and National Marine Fisheries Service. December 2009.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2004. Baywide Eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) Inventory in San Francisco Bay: Pre-survey Screening Model and Eelgrass Survey Report. Prepared for California Department of Transportation. April 2004.

A1TACHMENT 7

376 Greenwood Beach Road I Tiburon, CA 94920 I Phone: (415) 388-2524 I richardsonbay.audubon.org

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1455 MARKET STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94103-1398

Regulatory Division

SUBJECT: File Number 2015-00419-N

Mr. David Holscher Holscher Architecture 1550 Tiburon Boulevard Belvedere, California 94920

Dear Mr. Holscher:

This letter is written in response to a request for comments on the Notice of Intent to adopt a negative declaration concerning your project, the construction of a floating dock and gangway, as described in a notice from the City of Belvedere received on November 2, 2015. Your project is located adjacent to Richardson Bay at 91 West Shore Road in the City of Belvedere, Marin County, California. Since this activity may involve the construction of floats and pilings and the discharge of associated fill material, it may impact a water of the U.S., and the Corps of Engineers will need to review those portions of your project.

All proposed work and/or structures extending bayward or seaward of the line on shore reached by: mean high water (MHW) in tidal waters, or ordinary high water in non-tidal waters designated as navigable waters of the United States, must be authorized by the Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. Section 403). Additionally, all work and structures proposed in unfilled portions of the interior of diked areas below former MHW must be authorized under Section 10 of the same statute.

All proposed discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States must be authorized by the Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1344). Waters of the United States generally include tidal waters, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), and wetlands.

Your proposed work appears to be within our jurisdiction and a permit may be required for your project. Application for Corps authorization should be made to this office using the application form in the enclosed pamphlet. To avoid delays it is essential that you enter the File Number at the top of this letter into Item No. 1 of the application. The application must include plans showing the location, extent and character of the proposed activity, prepared in accordance with the requirements contained in this pamphlet. You should note, in planning your project, that upon receipt of a properly completed application and plans, it may be necessary to advertise the proposed work by issuing a Public Notice for a period of 30 days.

Our Nationwide and Regional General Permits have already been issued to authorize certain activities provide specified conditions are met. Your completed application will enable us to -2-

determine whether your activity is already authorized. You are advised to refrain from starting your proposed activity until we make a determination that the project is covered by an existing permit.

Commencement of work before you receive our notification will be interpreted as a violation of our regulations.

The Corps regulatory program supports the national goal of"no overall net loss" of wetlands. For permitted activities that result in unavoidable losses, the Corps requires replacement wetlands to offset those losses. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released a new Compensatory Mitigation Rule on April 10, 2008, to clarify how to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to the nation's wetlands and streams. A copy of this rule can be found on our Headquarters website: http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits/mitig_info.aspx The new rule changes where and how mitigation is to be completed, but maintains existing requirements on when mitigation is required. The rule also preserves the requirement for applicants to avoid or minimize impacts to aquatic resources before proposing compensatory mitigation projects to offset permitted impacts. Regulatory Guidance Letter 08-03 in the enclosed pamphlet provides guidance on minimum monitoring requirements for compensatory mitigation projects, including the required minimum content for monitoring reports.

The Corps of Engineers receives thousands of requests each year to perform wetland delineations for potential applicants for permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Due to limited staff and resources, response time can be several months or longer. To expedite this process, the San Francisco District encourages applicants to use consultants to conduct wetland delineations, especially for large and/or complex areas. The San Francisco District is not authorized to recommend any private consulting services and advises applicants to check references and referrals of prospective consultants before contracting services.

The Corps also suggests that you contact the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Wildlife office to ensure they review your project relative to their permitting requirements for activities that may impact aquatic resources. -3-

You may refer any questions on this matter to Daniel Breen of my Regulatory staff by telephone at (415) 503-6769 or by e-mail at [email protected]. All correspondence should be addressed to the Regulatory Division, North Branch, referencing the file number at the head of this letter.

Sincerely,

Acting Chief, Regulatory Division

Enclosures

Copies Furnished:

Ms. Jayni Allsep City of Belvedere 450 San Rafael A venue Belvedere, California 94920

CA DFW, Yountville, CA CA RWQCB, Oakland, CA